To ask if free school meals should be abolished?

[SphJC]

As above^

I have my own opinion on this but keen to hear others before I share my own.

[partyatthepalace]

@partyatthepalace

Zig4zag

Mxflamingnoravera
Zig4Zag has it ever occurred to you that people's situations change? That not all low income families started out this way? That women fleeing domestic violence or who have left an abusive partner often end up on low income because the father of their children refuses or fudges to avoid paying maintenance.
God help you if you ever find yourself in need.

Yes that's why the foster system is there. No children should have to live In poverty because of their parents situation

*@Zig4zag* 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

How much have you been drinking?? - that is the stupidest comment I have read on MN this year. You are suggesting that poor families should have their children taken away from them to be looked after by foster carers (of which there is a National shortage), rather than pay for free school meals (foster care quite a lot more expensive than cheap lunches) and despite the fact putting a child into care reduces his or her life chances far more than all seriously abusive family situations.

Did you actually finish school?? 😂

Correction for last line - all BUT seriously abusive family situations

The tears of laughter stay tho...

[ladymalfoy45]

In an ideal world, school meals would be made on site. Every child in a state school would get breakfast if they required it and and a healthy snack at breaktime.
I'd can all of those awful pasta and curry bars because they are expensive and the only reason they are popular with schools is because they are quick to serve and eat.
I know as adults we can get by on a 30 minute lunch,but why are we encouraging our children to do the same?
I see pupils standing up or walking around eating because they don't have time to sit down and relax.
Homemade food.
School meals are ridiculously expensive to buy in and nutritionally woeful.
In conversations with school cooks over the years ,they all say the same things.
It is easier and cheaper for them to cook from scratch in the school kitchens with local produce provided t a special rate because the suppliers value children and understand how important good food is.

[BrumBoo]

How about no kids until you're in a financially secure position, mandatory parent life insurance, etc. - that would also prevent kids from going hungry..?

@Sunflowers095 if every person in the UK decided to wait until they were absolutely financially secure to have children, including stable housing (a mortgage), a huge amount of savings in case their job disappeared (at least a years worth), that they were well established in their job (at least two years and decent maternity package with even more savings per child for childcare), then the population of the UK would go into a huge decline.

Most families are receiving some type of government financial support, that's the issue when you don't pay people enough and punish people women for having children at all.

[Zig4zag]

And yes I did finish school and i am intelligent enough to not have children without a financially solid back up plan.

[JustLyra]

@Sunflowers095 Who is going to look out for the child welfare of children whose parents can’t or don’t if not the state?


Saying “people shouldn’t have kids unless they’re 100% financially stable” doesn’t change the fact there are hungry children. It also doesn’t cover the decimation in intervention services.

So whilst “don’t have kids unless you can 100% afford them no matter what” may be an idealistic position it’s not a realistic position and doesn’t actually help the children in any way.

[JustLyra]

@Zig4zag

And yes I did finish school and i am intelligent enough to not have children without a financially solid back up plan.

You can’t be that intelligent if you think foster care is a reasonable alternative to free school meals.

[malificent7]

There are quite a few people who believe in eugenics eg..only the succesful should breed.

[JustLyra]

@Zig4zag

I am suggesting that kids get taken put of poverty. It is more than just meals. Their quality of life is poor in everything else also.

Have you any idea about the outcomes for children in the care system?

[BrumBoo]

You can’t be that intelligent if you think foster care is a reasonable alternative to free school meals.

Absolutely this. Someone who wants to fix child poverty by using one of the most expensive social care options, where many children leave with much lower education targets and future prospects, therefore beginning the cycle all over again, is pretty thick actually.

[partyatthepalace]

@Zig4zag

I am suggesting that kids get taken put of poverty. It is more than just meals. Their quality of life is poor in everything else also.

Oh yes that’s a great idea @zig4zag - we should take all children on fsm away from their parents and then using the special Dolly the sheep magic science we’ll clone loads of well off adoptive parents and all the kids will go and live with them they’ll all have lovely homes with ponies and cath kidson plates and mandarin conversation classes. Yay!

You can still put in for London Mayor zig4, you’d be BRILLIANT 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

[IceCreamAndCandyfloss]

How about no kids until you're in a financially secure position, mandatory parent life insurance, etc. - that would also prevent kids from going hungry..?Why is it always the government's responsibility but not the parents to make sure their children are looked after, including basic needs. And before you say I'm being unreasonable, I'm not talking about the very small number of extremely unfortunate situations, I'm talking about people who have kids when they're not married, not in stable jobs, not financially secure, decide to be stay at home parents hoping their partner will always be capable of earning enough and won't leave

I suppose because the system allows it and there’s no penalty for failing to support a child/children.

If there were no child related payments would people make different choices I wonder? The idea of compulsory insurance rather than other means is interesting and puts the responsibility on the parents.

[IceCreamAndCandyfloss]

that's the issue when you don't pay people enough

Very subjective though and we have a minimum wage in place anyway. It’s not the governments or employers fault if an adult makes choices they can’t afford.

[TowandaForever]

It's a minimum not living wage hence the need for tax and universal credit.

[BrumBoo]

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

that's the issue when you don't pay people enough

Very subjective though and we have a minimum wage in place anyway. It’s not the governments or employers fault if an adult makes choices they can’t afford.

Minimum wage and zero hour contracts. Yes, of course it's the individual's fault if one month they can just about get by, and next month earn less than some middle-class teen will do washing Daddy's Audi .

[WhatWouldPhyllisCraneDo]

@Zig4zag

I am suggesting that kids get taken put of poverty. It is more than just meals. Their quality of life is poor in everything else also.

There's more to quality of life than money. A good friend of mine was raised by very wealthy parents. Private school (same one as The DoC for context), massive allowance, foreign holidays etc etc. He recently inherited £2m+ from his Granny.
He said he would trade all that for the childhood (technically classed as in poverty) of my DC. Because all the money in the world wouldn't have made him happy as a child who's parents clearly didn't GAF about him.

[Blueberries0112]

“How about no kids until you're in a financially secure position“

I don’t know about other countries but in U.S. , big businesses get to decide how well you can be paid . It can affect your decision when the right time to have children. Beside A lot of people prefer to have children when they are young, not after 35 (health risks for both mother and child) and they are not always financially stable at a young age.

[Sunflowers095]

@BrumBoo

How about no kids until you're in a financially secure position, mandatory parent life insurance, etc. - that would also prevent kids from going hungry..?

*@Sunflowers095* if every person in the UK decided to wait until they were absolutely financially secure to have children, including stable housing (a mortgage), a huge amount of savings in case their job disappeared (at least a years worth), that they were well established in their job (at least two years and decent maternity package with even more savings per child for childcare), then the population of the UK would go into a huge decline.

Most families are receiving some type of government financial support, that's the issue when you don't pay people enough and punish people women for having children at all.

That's a fair point, but most people don't even do the bare minimum. Lots of threads in mumsnet about people who want to be a SAHP because they want to be with their child. That's fine, but it's a poor financial choice long term. Lots of people driving cars they can't really afford but still renting.

All I'm saying is that where I come from people don't have those luxuries if they can't afford them. Both parents work, if you have children and finances are bad no one has a nice car or an iphone. No school meals and most people get by (and the economy and wages are much worse in comparison).

A lot of it must be a mentality thing. And while I agree that that there should be a better system overall (including taxing massive corporations), I don't think the school meals are the problem, I think the huge amount of people bringing children into the world without proper consideration is where the majority of the issue lies.

The root cause needs to be addressed (children living in poverty) but that is on both the government and the people who bring these children into the world in the first place. The lack of personal responsibility in these situations is alarming.

[Awalkintime]

Universal free school meals - yes unless the government fully fund them as they currently aren't and means the kids miss out education wise as a result.

Means tested free school meals - no.

[Blueberries0112]

adult makes choices they can’t afford— there are more minimum wage jobs than there are high paying jobs and not everyone get a chance. It’s a race

[Zig4zag]

You wouldn't have children if you were on minimum wage or a zero hour contract though. Would you? Seriously. Who would have a child without 2 medium incomes and a good amount of savings. Because you know what? You don't know what's round the corner (As people keep reminding each other)

[Kendodd]

All meals at school should be free. All music lessons, sports clubs at school should be free
I agree and think this is a great idea.
Healthy vegetarian lunches, eaten at a table with proper crockery and a knife and fork and enough time to eat it.
Free music lessons and sports lessons for children. Just imagine how many brilliant musicians and sports people we must be missing at the moment because the parents can't afford the costs.
And as for all the 'we can't afford it' lot I bet plenty of these people pay for their own children to have these advantages, why don't you want poor children to have these things as well? We set up the NHS and welfare state in the aftermath of WW2 when we were skint, thank God you lot didn't get your way then.

[JustLyra]

@Zig4zag

You wouldn't have children if you were on minimum wage or a zero hour contract though. Would you? Seriously. Who would have a child without 2 medium incomes and a good amount of savings. Because you know what? You don't know what's round the corner (As people keep reminding each other)

You’re at it. Completely at it.

[JustLyra]

@Kendodd

All meals at school should be free. All music lessons, sports clubs at school should be free
I agree and think this is a great idea.
Healthy vegetarian lunches, eaten at a table with proper crockery and a knife and fork and enough time to eat it.
Free music lessons and sports lessons for children. Just imagine how many brilliant musicians and sports people we must be missing at the moment because the parents can't afford the costs.
And as for all the 'we can't afford it' lot I bet plenty of these people pay for their own children to have these advantages, why don't you want poor children to have these things as well? We set up the NHS and welfare state in the aftermath of WW2 when we were skint, thank God you lot didn't get your way then.

Why vegetarian? Meat is part of a healthy and balance diet for many people.

[Kendodd]

Why vegetarian?
Because I think we should all eat more vegetables. Children who see their friends eat vegetables are more likely to eat them themselves. Vegetarian would cover halal children or other cultural needs. Less meat is better for the planet. Probably cheaper.
I'm not vegetarian myself btw.

[Waxonwaxoff0]

@Zig4zag

You wouldn't have children if you were on minimum wage or a zero hour contract though. Would you? Seriously. Who would have a child without 2 medium incomes and a good amount of savings. Because you know what? You don't know what's round the corner (As people keep reminding each other)

So people on minimum wage should never have children?